Appeal No. 2001-1772 Page 8
Application No. 09/059,699
642 F.2d 413, 425, 208 USPQ 871, 881 (CCPA 1981). Considering Ferraro in this light
does not alter our conclusion that it does not disclose or teach the subject matter recited in
claim 10, in that we fail to perceive any teaching, suggestion or incentive which would have
led one of ordinary skill in the art to modify Ferraro by providing a separate platform
member and spacer. Further consideration of Booth does not overcome this deficiency.
The combined teachings of Ferraro and Booth fail to establish a prima facie case
of obviousness with regard to the subject matter of claim 16, and we will not sustain the
rejection.
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007